Pfizer Recipients testing positive in Israel

Feedback out of Israel. They have been testing recipients that have had both shots and the 14 days max benifit time and their finding 33% of them are testing positive for the Covid Virus.

Quote:

---

More than 12,400 in Israel were reportedly infected after accepting Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccine, which led to doubts over the vaccine's efficacy, despite the reported 95 percent efficacy in Phase III clinical trials.

---

Quote:

---

Israel's health ministry tested 189,000 people after they received Pfizer's vaccine and 6.6 percent of the people, including 69 who had received two shots, still tested positive for COVID-19, according to media reports.

---

Quote:

---

According to media reports, within two weeks after the first dose, recipients in Israel show similar infection rates as those who have not received shots. But those vaccinated started to show 33 percent fewer new infections than the others after the second dose.

The difference between a real world and experimental environment, such as the scale of the participants and whether the recipients continue wearing masks after injections, could also lead to inconformity in results, according to experts reached by the Global Times.

---

https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202101/1213566.shtml

A little more info:

The vaccine efficacy of 33% noted in studies in Israel was conducted on the most vulnerable...those over 60 yr old who go the first shots.
Since Pfizer's initial trails used many more young people it's efficacy was claim of 52%.

Quote:

---

A preliminary report from the Clalit Research Institute compared the infection data of 200 000 people aged 60 and over who were not vaccinated with the infection data of 200 000 people of the same age group who received one vaccine dose and were monitored for at least 11 days from the date of vaccination. On day 14 there was a “significant decrease of about 33% in the rate of positive tests for the coronavirus” among those who had been vaccinated. This decrease remained the same between days 15 and 17.

The report has raised concerns, as published results have suggested that the efficacy of the Pfizer vaccine was 52.4% between the first and second dose (spaced 21 days apart), and data assessed by Public Health England indicated it could be as much as 89% protective from day 15 to 21.

The Clalit Research Institute stressed, however, that its results included only people aged 60 and over—whereas Pfizer trials also included younger people—and that the findings have not yet been peer reviewed. Additionally, the Clalit study identified those infected according to laboratory tests of those who chose to be tested, while Pfizer’s studies only referred to the appearance of symptomatic disease.

---

I think that is based on the first shot only.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

A little more info:

The vaccine efficacy of 33% noted in studies in Israel was conducted on the most vulnerable...those over 60 yr old who go the first shots.
Since Pfizer's initial trails used many more young people it's efficacy was claim of 52%.

---

It'll be very interesting to see how all of this plays out. Thanks for posting Mike.

I have a feeling a lot of people are going to feel extremely cheated by Pfizer in the coming year.

Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GW11

It'll be very interesting to see how all of this plays out. Thanks for posting Mike.

I have a feeling a lot of people are going to feel extremely cheated by Pfizer in the coming year.

Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk

---

Sure hope it pans out. A vaccine failure...........lets not even go there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by warpipe

Sure hope it pans out. A vaccine failure...........lets not even go there.

---

If Israel's data confirms...then the most vulnerable, the 60+ will NOT be fully protected with this vaccine.
Let's hope the more traditional vaccines (non mRNA) , like Johnson and Johnson will have better test results.

Are they "testing positive" because the vaccine exposed them to it as most do, or are they actually sick?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FishHog

Are they "testing positive" because the vaccine exposed them to it as most do, or are they actually sick?

---

The mRNA does not expose them to the Virus....

The problem is, it's not a protein based vaccine like Johnson and Johnson.

Quote:

---

Current antiviral vaccine designs can be described as falling into 2 camps: protein based or gene based. Protein-based vaccines deliver the immune system–stimulating antigen to the body. This category includes whole-inactivated (killed) vaccines, as in the polio and flu shots, and subunit vaccines and virus-like particles, like in the hepatitis B and human papillomavirus vaccines.

---

more info: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2770485

I really don't care for what they are doing here and the path forward. They freely admit to editing DNA.
https://www.rochester.edu/newscenter...search-428952/

"For the past few years, Anderson’s lab has developed tools and delivery systems that use the RNA-targeting CRISPR-Cas13 to treat human genetic diseases that affect muscle function. CRISPR-Cas13 is like a molecular pair of scissors that can target specific RNAs for degradation, using small, programmable guide RNAs.

When the health crisis first became apparent in Wuhan, China, researchers in Anderson’s lab turned their focus toward developing a CRISPR-Cas13 therapeutic aimed at SARS-CoV-2. Applying the knowledge already available about coronavirus RNA replication, they designed single CRISPR guide RNAs capable of targeting every viral RNA that is made within a SARS-CoV-2 infected cell. Using a novel cloning method developed in Anderson’s lab, multiple CRISPR guide-RNAs could be packaged into a single therapeutic vector (a genetically engineered carrier) to target numerous viral RNA sites simultaneously. The multi-pronged targeting strategy could be used as a therapy to safeguard against virus-induced cell toxicity and prevent ‘escape’ of viruses which may have undergone mutation.

“Infectious viruses and pandemics seemingly come out of nowhere, which has made it hard to rapidly develop and screen traditional small molecule therapeutics or vaccines,” Anderson says. “There is a clear need to develop alternative targeted therapeutics, such as CRISPR-Cas13, which have the ability to be rapidly reprogrammed to target new emerging pandemics.”

Maderna just said the vaccine they have will protect them the UK variant

From testing they just did on the south Africa and Brazilian variant the case's go up 6fold . They will be making another version of the vaccine for a booster shot to take next year.

I think all the traditional vaccines will be useless as the virus changes to fast .
It's changing faster than phones lol buy it in the spring and it obsolete by fall. It's why there has been no effective vaccine made for the coronavirus they tried for many years for a successful one . Who knows maybe all the new funding will provide and opportunity to develop one.

Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

It doesn't edit your DNA, not even possible with this Vacine.

Please Please read how it actually works.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by impact

I really don't care for what they are doing here and the path forward. They freely admit to editing DNA.
https://www.rochester.edu/newscenter...search-428952/

"For the past few years, Anderson’s lab has developed tools and delivery systems that use the RNA-targeting CRISPR-Cas13 to treat human genetic diseases that affect muscle function. CRISPR-Cas13 is like a molecular pair of scissors that can target specific RNAs for degradation, using small, programmable guide RNAs.

When the health crisis first became apparent in Wuhan, China, researchers in Anderson’s lab turned their focus toward developing a CRISPR-Cas13 therapeutic aimed at SARS-CoV-2. Applying the knowledge already available about coronavirus RNA replication, they designed single CRISPR guide RNAs capable of targeting every viral RNA that is made within a SARS-CoV-2 infected cell. Using a novel cloning method developed in Anderson’s lab, multiple CRISPR guide-RNAs could be packaged into a single therapeutic vector (a genetically engineered carrier) to target numerous viral RNA sites simultaneously. The multi-pronged targeting strategy could be used as a therapy to safeguard against virus-induced cell toxicity and prevent ‘escape’ of viruses which may have undergone mutation.

“Infectious viruses and pandemics seemingly come out of nowhere, which has made it hard to rapidly develop and screen traditional small molecule therapeutics or vaccines,” Anderson says. “There is a clear need to develop alternative targeted therapeutics, such as CRISPR-Cas13, which have the ability to be rapidly reprogrammed to target new emerging pandemics.”

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greatwhite

It doesn't edit your DNA, not even possible with this Vacine.

Please Please read how it actually works.

---

It is not a vaccine. It is a medical device.

No it is not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by impact

It is not a vaccine. It is a medical device.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by impact

It is not a vaccine. It is a medical device.

---

That's my understanding they call it one because we are in a pandemic or epidemic depending who talks lol.

It's a treatment to suppress the symptoms and has zero test done if it can still be spread.

Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greatwhite

No it is not.

---

"Messenger RNA is considered by both the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to be gene therapy “even though RNA does not interact with the genome,” said Meffen in giving a regulatory overview of the two types of RNA therapies. However, mRNA, which is regulated by the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) is not yet classified as a regenerative medicine advanced therapy (RMAT). EMA considers mRNA to be an advanced therapy medicinal product (ATMP)."

https://www.raps.org/news-and-articl...considerations

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by warpipe

Sure hope it pans out. A vaccine failure...........lets not even go there.

---

Vaccine failure isn't as concerning as what we might unintentionally create by using vaccines that don't work well.

This article was written in 2015, so there's no covid-bias.

"Some vaccines support evolution of more-virulent viruses -- ScienceDaily" https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0727143139.htm

"When a vaccine works perfectly, as do the childhood vaccines for smallpox, polio, mumps, rubella, and measles, it prevents vaccinated individuals from being sickened by the disease, and it also prevents them from transmitting the virus to others," Read said. These vaccines are a type that is "perfect" because they are designed to mimic the perfect immunity that humans naturally develop after having survived one of these diseases. "Our research demonstrates that another vaccine type allows extremely virulent forms of a virus to survive -- like the one for Marek's disease in poultry, against which the poultry industry is heavily reliant on vaccination for disease control," said Venugopal Nair, who led the research team in the United Kingdom where the experimental work related to this study was carried out. Nair is the head of the Avian Viral Diseases program at the Pirbright Institute, which also hosts the OIE Reference Laboratory on Marek's disease.

"These vaccines also allow the virulent virus to continue evolving precisely because they allow the vaccinated individuals, and therefore themselves, to survive", Nair said.
"Less-than-perfect vaccines create a 'leaky' barrier against the virus, so vaccinated individuals sometimes do get sick, but typically with less-virulent symptoms. Because the vaccinated individuals survive long enough to transmit the virus to others, the virus also is able to survive and to spread throughout a population. "In our tests of the leaky Marek's-disease virus in groups of vaccinated and unvaccinated chickens, the unvaccinated died while those that were vaccinated survived and transmitted the virus to other birds left in contact with them," Nair said. "Our research demonstrates that the use of leaky vaccines can promote the evolution of nastier 'hot' viral strains that put unvaccinated individuals at greater risk."


Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk